VCD - What's the point ?

[lpn1160]

Cornucopia: Bravo, well said!

[dcapp1]

lpn1160: Your 30 minute clip was indeed very good quality. Can you tell me what your computer specs are like, and what kind of capture device you use. Thanks

[The village idiot]

[sigh] Remember that not all countries are as rich as some of the European and North American countries. VCD represents a cost effective solution for those countries. Also remember that perhaps, more than half of the worlds population lives in those same countries.

[kwag]

DOH. You just know it eh? Even XVCDs are as good as VHS at best, and even lower for the most part. SVCD can be ok, but (X)VCD, forget it.

"Cough!", just for you: http://www.kvcd.net/test-newmat-cq-.mpg ( No audio )
And just like that on ONE CD. The complete 136 minutes, including final credits.

Enjoy!

[bbb]

VCD serves the purpose of compatibility with old computer systems and most DVD players.

A PAL VCD, at best, can look pretty good especially if using a dvd player that reprocesses the video. However, if you are making a NTSC VCD, it will look blurrier due to NTSC's lower resolution. Also, when viewed on a computer, both PAL and NTSC VCDs look really blurry.

This is the main complaint of VCD: blurriness/lack of clarity. Small print, text, and details on a VCD are blurred out. There is really no satisfactory way to address this blurriness problem due to VCD's low resolution. However, this is the price you pay for for compatibility.

I do make VCDs for friends to ensure compatibility.
For personal VHS archival purposes I make SVCDs and CVDs because I know my dvd players and computers can handle them.

There are people who experiment with wierd resolutions and wierd non-standard settings but this can seriously mess up compatibility with standalone dvdplayers so I avoid such non-standards. Instead of trying to break standards, I think people should concentrate on improving the source by capturing at decent resolutions, applying necessary filters, proper deinterlacing, and proper resizing.

[crahak]

Looks better than most XVCDs I've seen, however, lots of players will have issues with mpeg1 at film fps and such resolutions. I'd rather make SVCD's instead. Your templates aren't bad, but again, quality and time is always a trade off. This wasn't quite DVD quality, ok, it was better than VHS, when I said as good as VHS at most, I didn't mean with resolutions like this... It's watchable, but again, (X)VCDs isn't for everyone.

[kwag]

This wasn't quite DVD quality, ok, it was better than VHS, when I said as good as VHS at most, I didn't mean with resolutions like this... It's watchable, but again, (X)VCDs isn't for everyone.

If your player can handle it, go for it!
The target for that was to fit on one CD. If I had selected 2 CD's as target with file prediction, there wouldn't be a difference from the original source.
That encode is really pushing MPEG-1 to the limits (for the time being ). For 138 minutes on one 800MB CD, I think it's pretty good! On 2 CD's, it would be completely blockless and artifact free.

-kwag

[Conquest10]

yeah, kwag i love your templates. the other day i got star wars episode II on one disc. that's 145 minutes. and it looked awesome on my 35''screen. not as good as the original, after all what is? but a lot better than most dvds out there.

[thxkid]

As a owner of a Panasonic DMR-E10 and E20 DVD recorder and a HP DVD200i burner, sorry But I will never go back to VCD, XVCD, SVCD, XSVCD, these devices just blows them away does that mean I will not ever has a use for them, No I personally won't but I still have realitives and friends that can't afford the DVD way so I still hold onto my Capture card and my temp plates for XVCD and XSVCD in TMPGE ofr those purposes, and the crappy internet cam movies, why waste a DVD-R or DVD+R on something that crappy. My family video's on DVD look just like my original HI-8mm or SVHS Tapes, XVCD never did but XSVCD came close, plus I like the idea of 448k of 5.1 audio on my DVD's over 160 to 224 2.0 digital audio. That my capture card can get a great capture at 704x480 at 8500 bitrate for about an hours worth of perfect digital video, yeah its been worth the extra money on the DVD, but 2-3 years ago I could not afford to go this way not even 18 months ago. Its not so much if there is a reason for it, as much what you can afford, plus half the fun with VCD's is figuring out how to make it look better all the time, its always been a trial and error with that format, If I look at the VCD's I did in 1999 they look like carp compared to the stuff I can do today in the (X)VCD format.